'Diary of a Wimpy Kid' (2010)

And this is not simply from a bored middle-aged dad who would rather have been watching 'Hot Tub Time Machine', but from a father who cares deeply for his childrens' sense of morality. The movie, based on the ridiculously popular 'novel in cartoons' by Jeff Kinney, is one which children will enjoy, but from which they will take away a very skewed sense of right and wrong, and a very twisted idea of what they should be trying to 'achieve' in middle school.

This is irresponsible filmmaking, a claim I don't take lightly and one I've only ever used once or twice before (including for 'Boondock Saints', a reprehensible film that a generation seems to have embraced, despite its rampant hatefulness and intolerance. I implore you not to get me started.)

'Diary' concerns 11 year old Greg, a selfish opportunist and an ultimately irredeemably flawed protagonist. His one want is to become popular. Famous. And in his wacky journey to become so, he steps on, sets up, and turns his back on all of the decent, good-hearted kids who would rather just hang out, play games and have fun.

And though my 11 year old seemed to recognize Greg for the creep he was, the other three children in our posse did not. In fact, they quite liked him, this 'hero' whose eyes through which we see the film, an opinion the filmmakers clearly wanted their tween audience to take away. See, the filmmakers try to redeem Greg at the end of 'Diary', in an act that kids will see as heroic and selfless, but a mature set of eyes will see through as self-serving and shallow. His act was simply another opportunity to ingratiate himself into the populist status quo. An attempt to 'martyr' himself, ostensibly for the good of the school, but in truth to further his aspirations to become 'popular'... certainly not to protect the friend he had treated so badly.

Now... I recognize my (admittedly overly-) vitriolic reaction is a little goofy. To be honest, Greg's comeuppance and subsequent 'payback' was supposed to be cathartic for his character and to re-establish his 'goodness' (which was [weakly] established early in the film). It's just that the filmmakers screwed it up royally, a fact made clear with their invention (not in the book) of a character who is meant to be a 'voice of reason' throughout the film, obtusely pointing out to Greg (and the audience) that he is a jerk. Her creation suggests an inability to portray the book's characterizations on screen, something my 11 year confirmed.

'Diary' (and 'Boondock' for that matter) are irresponsible films because the filmmakers fail to recognize that the characters they put forth as 'heroes' are, in fact, not; the writers and directors celebrate the characters' immature, dangerous and flawed behavior, and in turn, encourage the audience to do the same.* With 'Boondock', the audience, quite frankly, should know better. But with 'Diary', we're talking about pre-teen kids.

And because of that, the filmmakers should be ashamed.

* for examples of far better filmmakers creating 'dangerous or flawed' protagonists, see John McNaughton 'Portrait of a Serial Killer' or Todd Solondz's 'Happiness'. These films successfully create with the audience an empathy with monstrous characters. And that's very tough to do. And very tough to sit through.